Ex-CIA Officers Rip Bush Over Rove Leak

[IChing]

By DONNA DE LA CRUZ
Associated Press Writer





WASHINGTON (AP) -- Former U.S. intelligence officers criticized President Bush on Friday for not disciplining Karl Rove in connection with the leak of the name of a CIA officer, saying Bush's lack of action has jeopardized national security.

In a hearing held by Senate and House Democrats examining the implications of exposing Valerie Plame's identity, the former intelligence officers said Bush's silence has hampered efforts to recruit informants to help the United States fight the war on terror. Federal law forbids government officials from revealing the identity of an undercover intelligence officer.
>>>snip



>>>>>snip
Bush said last week, "I think it's best that people wait until the investigation is complete before you jump to conclusions. And I will do so, as well."

Dana Perino, a White House spokesman, said Friday that the administration would have no comment on the investigation while it was continuing.

Patrick Lang, a retired Army colonel and defense intelligence officer, said Bush's silence sends a bad signal to foreigners who might be thinking of cooperating with the U.S. on intelligence matters.

Some of the quotes

"This says to them that if you decide to cooperate, someone will give you up, so you don't do it," Lang said. "They are not going to trust you in any way."

Johnson, who said he is a registered Republican, said he wished a GOP lawmaker would have the courage to stand up and "call the ugly dog the ugly dog."

"Where are these men and women with any integrity to speak out against this?" Johnson asked. "I expect better behavior out of Republicans."



"I wouldn't be here this morning if President Bush had done the one thing required of him as commander in chief - protect and defend the Constitution," said Larry Johnson, a former CIA analyst. "The minute that Valerie Plame's identity was outed, he should have delivered a strict and strong message to his employees."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CIA_LEAK_DEMOCRATS?SITE=MNMAN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2005-07-22-15-22-38

[redqueen]

1. Amazing that repukes are trying to pretend it's no big deal.

They're all nuts... president screws around, and they go into a blinding rage... president lets his #1 guy get away with leaking the name of a covert agent -- a NOC no less! -- and they brush it off as if it were nothing.

:crazy:

[rodeodance]

2. yeah for WPost for carrying the AP story. wish they would do a big

story themselves.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/22/AR2005072201261.html

Ex-CIA Officers Rip Bush Over Rove Leak

By DONNA DE LA CRUZ
The Associated Press
Friday, July 22, 2005; 3:22 PM

WASHINGTON -- Former U.S. intelligence officers criticized President Bush on Friday for not disciplining Karl Rove in connection with the leak of the name of a CIA officer, saying Bush's lack of action has jeopardized national security.

[rodeodance]

5. but good that it is an AP story as think it will get wider circulation.

[stepnw1f]

6. That's Because Repukes Are "Full-of-It"

At best... posers.

[joeunderdog]

8. As long as the media doesn't tell the constituents to get mad,

then there'll be no pressure to do the right thing. With the media, the judges and the voting machines on the Repukes side, they're posturing to survive the biggest political catastrophe ever.

Hold the fort, weather the storm, and wait for the next distraction.

Let's just hope there's enough media outlets who want to ride this story.

[Iowa]

42. Joeunderdog Nailed It...

Well said! You've summed up the crux of the matter in just a few well-written words.

[rfranklin]

20. There's no mystery to their behavior....

It's not morality, it's not ethics, and certainly not doing the job efficiently. It's all about power and scamming the gullible amongst us who still believe in Norman Rockwell and apple pie.

[redqueen]

22. Yeah but I'm talking about the gullible...

Come on... who really believes screwing around is more serious than revealing the identity of a covert agent?

These people are either out and out hypocrites or just plain nutso.

[QuettaKid]

26. they are PLAIN NUTSO....

check the post about the "creationist summer camps"...these people ACTUALLY BELIEVE that Alley Oop might have gotten it right and that humans rode dinosaurs like cattle. I am NOT making this up....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4160127

[redqueen]

32. Holy crap!

:rofl:

[sabra]

3. I was waiting for this to hit the wire! Thanks and reco'd

[cal04]

4. Ex-CIA Officers Rip Bush Over Rove Leak/Yahoo

Former U.S. intelligence officers criticized
President Bushon Friday for not disciplining Karl Rove in connection with the leak of the name of a CIA officer, saying Bush's lack of action has jeopardized national security.

In a hearing held by Senate and House Democrats examining the implications of exposing Valerie Plame's identity, the former intelligence officers said Bush's silence has hampered efforts to recruit informants to help the United States fight the war on terror. Federal law forbids government officials from revealing the identity of an undercover intelligence officer.

"I wouldn't be here this morning if President Bush had done the one thing required of him as commander in chief — protect and defend the Constitution," said Larry Johnson, a former CIA analyst. "The minute that Valerie Plame's identity was outed, he should have delivered a strict and strong message to his employees."

Rove, Bush's deputy chief of staff, told Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper in a 2003 phone call that former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife worked for the CIA on weapons of mass destruction issues, according to an account by Cooper in the magazine. Rove has not disputed that he told Cooper that Wilson's wife worked for the agency, but has said through his lawyer that he did not mention her by name.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050722/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_democrats_1

[IChing]

21. Thanks for the link, I just voted on this

224 votes 4.5 stars

[cal04]

28. Washington Post now has it

Ex-CIA Officers Rip Bush Over Rove Leak

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/22/AR2005072201261.html

[lady lib]

43. And it's through the Associated Press....

which means it will be in every major newspaper by tomorrow. Cool.

[Demeter]

7. Get a Clue, Johnson--They Aren't Republicans!

They are fascists, and they are hell-bent on using you and any other undiscerning, label-buying, media-dazzled fool to pull the greatest act of totalitarian overthrow ever. Think Mussolini, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, etc., ad nauseum.

[Bumblebee]

9. Good story

They did hope no one would notice.

[Generator]

10. This quote from Bush can be read another way

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4162488&mesg_id=4162488

I have no idea whether we'll find out who the leaker is," the president told reporters. "Partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers."

He was never interested in finding the leakers. He was confident the press would never give them up. That's the whole enchilada in a nutshell. And of course he knows who leaked-I'm sure he approved of it wholeheartdly. That probably could never be proven-but the quote shows exactly what he was thinking.

[rodeodance]

52. yeah but the plan, if there was one, is slowly crumpling.

[alfredo]

11. Bush put his party above the country. He is unfit to serve.

[Stuckinthebush]

12. Bush has to pretend this is no big deal

Why? Because Bush was involved. He knew it was going on and was involved at the ground floor. If he doesn't try to protect Rove and Libby, he may get dragged into the mud.

Bush is a criminal.

[IChing]

14. So are all the republicans that smeared the CIA

I think that this is a great political football

at this post: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1948564&mesg_id=1948564

[Stuckinthebush]

16. Agreed

I do believe that the GOP congressmen and women who are trying to push this under the table are as guilty as Bush, Cheney, Rove and Libby.

I can't for the life of me figure out why so many Republican voters see no problem with this incident.

[IChing]

24. I don't understand that either

But, when I first posted that understanding on the other link the first response was from a

FREEPER, so I thought I struck a nerve.



If you could give my other post a kick

[Stuckinthebush]

63. Done!

Good post, by the way!

[rodeodance]

53. a greedy man in my book.

[Bumblebee]

13. Karen Hughes' hearing

Just two senators? WTF? What happened to challenging her on the GJ testimony? Something is seriously wrong with either the reporting or the Dems:

Karen Hughes on Track to Confirmation



By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: July 22, 2005

Filed at 3:01 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A scaled-back Senate Foreign Relations Committee showered praise Friday on Karen Hughes and put the former political adviser to President Bush on a fast track to confirmation as the State Department's top public relations official.

Only two senators attended the hearing. In the absence of votes in Congress on Fridays, most lawmakers leave early for the weekend.

[Bumblebee]

18. Or are they buying time till Tuesday?

Or do they think her position is not important? Something really fishy going on here...

[IChing]

48. ??? don't understand your point

[meganmonkey]

15. GREAT fucking headline!!!!

:woohoo:

on edit: the atricle itself is pretty good, too! My fave part:

Johnson, who said he is a registered Republican, said he wished a GOP lawmaker would have the courage to stand up and "call the ugly dog the ugly dog."

[IChing]

17. I agree it's one ugly dog and that dog can bark.

Hopefully the MSM will pick up on this.

[maddezmom]

19. recommended...great headline

[Lindacooks]

23. "I expect better behavior out of Republicans."???

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

What fantasy world is HE living in? Repukes only care about themselves, and they hate this country AND our freedoms.

[QuettaKid]

25. .

[McCamy Taylor]

61. * may have an Oedipal Complex and Sees the CIA as a limb of Dad.

Certainly, the only reason that the CIA is being as kind to * as they are is because they ADORE Papa Bush and will do nothing which might hurt him, and Papa Bush loves his son.

I feel sort of sorry for Bush Sr. watching his boy treat his beloved agency like dirt beneath his feet. It must be tearing Papa Bush up. He isnt about to turn on *, but he must be gnashing his teeth at what is being done to the Agency.

* is penance for all Bush Sr.'s sins, I guess. Too bad the rest of us have to suffer, too.

[goforit]

27. Well, Mr Johnson, What will happen if treasonous Bush refuses?

What will people do?

What will the CIA do?

What will the military do?

What will anybody do?

Where are the handcuffs....Where is the arrest....
Where is the action to remove these thugs from power?

[jefferson_dem]

29. Former agents criticize Bush over CIA leak (RATE IT UP, FRIENDS!)

Former agents criticize Bush over CIA leak

President Bush's failure to take action against a top aide involved in the outing of a covert CIA operative sends "the wrong message" overseas, former U.S. intelligence officials said on Friday.

At a hearing sponsored by Democrats, the retired agents said U.S. intelligence gathering had been damaged by the leak of Valerie Plame's name two years ago after her husband, former diplomat Joseph Wilson, criticized the White House's justification for going to war in Iraq.

Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper told a federal grand jury that presidential adviser Karl Rove told him that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, but did not disclose her name.

<SNIP>

"What has suffered irreversible damage is the credibility of our case officers when they try to convince an overseas contact that their safety is of primary importance to us," Jim Marcinkowski, a former CIA case officer, said.

<SNIP>

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=584&e=1&u=/nm/20050722/pl_nm/bush_leak_dc

[DemsUnited]

30. Done & kicked

[lakeguy]

31. done!

[sysoprock]

33. I saw this first on the front page of Yahoo.

Nice!

[Rainscents]

34. Done!

[Verve]

35. Done and Kick!

:kick:

[Barkley]

54. Done!

[leftchick]

36. Nice photo... Larry is Pissed!

[IChing]

37. I'm finally watching the whole thing on C-span 1 and they are all pissed

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

38. The headline is PRICELESS

It doesn't soften it at all. I'm totally shocked.

[IChing]

40. Yahoo changed the title but not WP or AP

Yahoo title is
Former agents criticize Bush over CIA leak

[DanCa]

39. No wonder the White House is pushing religion so much

Guilt Guilt Guilt Guilt.

[understandinglife]

41. Links to all the presentations at today's hearing:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4170075&mesg_id=4170075

http://www.peacecandy.com/gwbush/remindus
REMIND US

Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us - How ever long it takes, the day must come when tens of millions of caring individuals peacefully but persistently defy the dictator, deny the corporatists their cash flow, and halt the evil being done in Iraq and in all the other places the Bu$h neoconster regime is destroying civilization and the environment in the name of "America."

[realFedUp]

44. this is must see Tivo...nt

[IChing]

45. this is upsetting the freepers coming on DU

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1949297

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1948564&mesg_id=1948564

[realFedUp]

47. there must be a gene for recognizing the truth

tragically some just don't have it.

[rocktivity]

46. Rebroadcast on CSPAN at 4PM 8PM EST tonight

Their prime network in prime time. Meet you the official thread!

:headbang:
rocknation

[Paul Dlugokencky]

49. Stream it online anytime at C-SPAN.org

Go to http://www.c-span.org/homepage.asp to stream it. It's currently the first item under "Recent Programs"


http://www.cafepress.com/ImpeachBush43

[AnnieBW]

50. It's about time!

My husband was commenting last night that there was NO outrage being shown by the intelligence community - or the spouses of those who work in the intel community. "Cover" isn't just for the "Sydney Bristow" types who are doing secret stuff. It's for anybody who is going to a potentially hostile area, or who doesn't want their association with the CIA known.

I've said before that, with Ms. Plame working nuclear issues, she'd probably talked to people in Iran, China, or other hostile country. Now, with her name and picture being plastered all over the press, ANYBODY who had dealings with her in her covert identity would be in serious trouble. It compromised a valuable source on WMD.

As for her "setting up" the trip to Niger, she probably said something like, "my husband used to be the Ambassador. He knows the lay of the land." It wasn't like the idiots that kidnapped that Imam in Italy, then proceeded to stay at lavish hotels in Venice and Tuscany.

[rodeodance]

51. some slamed the Repugs good for having no ethics also!!!!

[democratic veteran]

55. What did they expect?

What did they expect from the Carl and the Couch Commandos? Honesty and Integrity?

When we sit on a jury judging a man accused of stealing $20 from WalMart we not only expect, but we demand, the Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing but the Truth!

Of course this administration does value WalMart's money far more than they value or soldier's lives.

[Raksha]

56. I just tried to ask a freeper on another forum if he watched the hearing.

He's STILL all tangled up in last weeks' spin. He said about Valerie and Joe Wilson, "She's a slut and he's a liar."

So I reminded him of the old saying, "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging!"

Don't think it will do any good though--this guy is a diehard kool-aid drinker!

It was very enlightening to get the intelligence community's POV on the Plame leak. They were very convincing in their explanations of why this will negatively impact America's intelligence-gathering capability for decades to come.

[roguevalley]

57. This man has been ripping over this since day one. He's incredible

to watch. I love him.

[IChing]

58. It was treason

Period

[DirtyDawg]

59. Just what Republicans were you....

...expecting more from Mr. Johnson? Your having fessed up to being a registered repig says a lot to me. First, that you've got some serious character flaws going in, and, second, that you're delusional if you don't understand that there's not a single republican in Washington that hasn't long since sold their souls for a few more years at the public trough. Don't get me wrong, these guys from the CIA, including George Tenant, had better do something to save whatever's left of their reputation, starting with showing some pissed-offedness during some of these hearings. You guys are supposed to have the 'right stuff'...show it dammit. Get mad...cuss somebody out...let 'em know that if they come around you in the future they'd better bring their Secret Service guys with 'em.

[jurassicpork]

60. He expects *what*?!

"Where are these men and women with any integrity to speak out against this?" Johnson asked. "I expect better behavior out of Republicans."

What was this guy, just born yesterday in a fucking cabbage patch? After Watergate, IranScam, Newt Gingrich and his clusterfuck of a Republican revolution and fall in disgrace and the countless scandals and Olympic-class fuckups of this administration and he expected "better behavior out of Republicans"???

JP
http://jurassicpork.blogspot.com

[Voltaire99]

62. When Democrats spend their time fretting about the poor, poor CIA...

...then it's clear they don't realize how far they've been dragged to the right.

"Whiteout" (ISBN: 1859842585) by Cockburn and St. Clair would be a good place for some here to start disabusing themselves of shocking misconceptions about national "security."

[magellan]

64. It's not the poor, poor CIA

There are good people in the CIA who have been hurt by this crime, and there's no doubting our national security has been severely damaged. But even more than that, a law has been broken. What the Dems are doing is exactly what ALL of Congress should be doing: learning why it's a crime and why they should care about it.

The Republicans are the ones who aren't interested in crimes by their own, as usual. The Dems are doing the right thing, taking testimony from these former CIA officers. There's no other way to cut through the piles of crap the Republicans keep dumping on this issue.

[Voltaire99]

67. "No doubting our nat'l security has been severely damaged"--pffft

Really? What is the proof? There isn't any, of course. National security is a fungible term. So is Plame's job description, "combatting the proliferation of WMDs."

Yes, there have always been good people in the CIA, even if the CIA itself has rarely been (or done any) good. History, however, suggests believing next to nothing from the organization or its agents.

So there is a very big case for doubting, indeed.

That's why it's a pity to watch Dems eager for Rove's neck--and who isn't?--crow about "treason," and rush to link the CIA with the national interest. That just moves you to the right, once again.

More good commentary on the matter here:
http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2005/07/roveplame_left-.asp

[magellan]

68. Read your "good commentary" and have one word for you: poppycock

The nerve of us galling Liberals using the 'treason' and 'liar' words. Don't we know they're the sole possession of the Republicans along with 'partisan politics', 'national security', 'traitor', and 'morals'?

The difference is when we use those words, they aren't "fungible" the way they are when the Right uses them.

Our enthusiastic desire to see the leaker(s) prosecuted isn't a superficial attempt to "score political points", nor is the Congressional Dem attempt to raise the gravity of this matter in the public conscience. If Rove is found guilty of a crime, it legitimizes further evidence of Bush**'s manipulation of intelligence (and intelligence gatherers) for his illegal war. I'm no fan of the CIA, but I'm even less a fan of ANY administration that decides it's going to do the CIA's job for it.

Thankfully Rove dropped himself into a mess of his own making. It's helping to bring BushCo's true motives with Iraq -- and the resulting increased threat to this nation -- to light. Your complaint should be with the Republicans who are so desperate to excuse these criminals.

[Carolab]

65. I gotta say that I loved what Johnson said about McCain though.

My, my, came right out and said he saw him on "Hardball" last night, calling him "an apologist for the administration".

[orleans]

66. if this doesn't get taken care of, if these criminals don't get booted

and hopefully jailed--we might have to start our own country!

hey wait a minute...didn't we already do that?

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[sellitman]

69. Bush-Rove loyalty a threat, CIA retirees say

Party Over Country.....The RNC way!! - Kevin

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
By SCOTT SHEPARD
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 07/23/05

Washington — A group of retired CIA officials on Friday accused President Bush of using a special investigation of White House leaks to avoid having to fire his longtime political adviser, Karl Rove.

The group said Bush — by allowing Rove to remain as deputy White House chief of staff — had undermined American security interests abroad. Rove was named as a source for news accounts disclosing the identity of a covert CIA agent married to an administration critic.

More: http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/0705/23natcialeak.html

[Justice]

70. Powerful Headline - Wow.

Thanks for posting story. You really see how angry the intelligence community is about what Rove et al did.

[Nay]

73. Maybe the intelligence community is angry,as you say, but what

the hell are they going to do about it? I notice that only retired CIA employees are speaking out. Can it be that present CIA employees are too scared to speak out or do anything? If they don't have the guts to put their jobs on the line for the nation, esp after all the years of crap about how they put their LIVES on the line for the U.S., then what are we citizens supposed to think? Are they waiting for 60-year-old grandmas to be shot down in the streets before they step forward and stop this madness? Are they waiting for a nuclear exchange to start? What are they waiting for?

[54anickel]

75. Keeping present employees out keep *co guessing as to which ones

are "unloyal" to their cause. Also keeps distance between the current CIA and "drama" that's unfolding inside the WH.

[sellitman]

78. I bet they are "deep throating" him as we speak.

The picture below is actually a possibility!

[indepat]

71. Loyalty to the Constitution and this Republic must take a backseat to

loyalty to the person and faithful underlings.

[Tesla]

72. He took an oath!!!

Before GOD!!!!!!

[rodeodance]

76. Rove said "Wilson's wife is fair game." This pretty much puts Rove

in the doghouse in my book.

[indepat]

79. The number of those in government and the military who have violated

their oaths of office in the run-up to Iraqi freedom and thereafter would be staggeringly unfathomable IMHO, but who cares what one person thinks?

[rodeodance]

80. says need to prove person 'knowingly' disclosed the name. We may

"know' this--with his comment of Wilsons wife is 'fair game'--but i do think it will hard to prove--legally.



....When the controversy over the leaks first began two years ago, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the president would fire anyone at the White House who was found to be involved. Since Rove's role has emerged in recent weeks, however, Bush has routinely deflected questions from reporters about his senior aide by citing the confidentiality of the special investigation under way. And this week, he appeared to shift his position a bit, saying he would fire anyone on his staff who "committed a crime."

It is difficult to prosecute anyone for breaking the federal law against identifying covert intelligence agents because it requires proof that the person "knowingly" disclosed an agent's identify. Rove has said he did not know Wilson's wife's name and did not provide that name to anyone.

But Rove was one of the sources for Time magazine's online report on the Plame-Wilson connection, which appeared on the same day as a column by conservative commentator Robert Novak that also named Plame.

According to Wilson, Rove subsequently told MSNBC's "Hardball" host Chris Matthews that "Wilson's wife is fair game."......

[Media_Lies_Daily]

87. Pure symantics flowing from the mouth of Rove's attorney. If that were...

...true, why has he been interviewed at least five times?

Rove himself has made a few statements...but he's still a subject of interest to the Grand Jury.

Additionally, too much has been said by others that have been asked to testify before the Grand Jury. Some of that testimony has apparently directly contradicted Rove's statements, otherwise Fitzgerald could have wrapped this up more than a year ago.

[keopeli]

74. DING DING DING - This is the correct answer.

The only special prosecution allowed under the reign of King George the Lesser can be explained by the need to cover a wrongdoing. Bush knew Rove and Libby had done it...betrayed our National Security for political purposes...purposes that helped lead us into a war that distracted us from the real terror abroad.

Now, that terror is being unleashed onto our closest ally, England. And al Quaeda is getting stronger every day. We allowed the enemy to run amok so that we could fulfill a dream of the secret oil barrons in a war brought about through treasonous deception. We have undone ourselves and our allies are being attacked.

Commissioning a Special Prosecutor to cover a crime is not appropriate behavior for a Commander In Chief.

The questions come down to this.

What did the President know and when did he know it?

[rodeodance]

77. lets hope the loyals stick together so they all go down together.

[54anickel]

81. I've got a stupid question.....

I'm suffering a brain fart. When this first went down, didn't the WH launch it's own investigation? If so, what type of investigation was that - did it have a name or panel/caucus or something?

How did the Fitzgerald investigation come about?

I'm trying to piece together the history of this in my head. I think it may be important to show that,like 9/11 they launch special non-Congressional caucuses to try and put an issue to rest. Isn't a lie to a non-Congressional committee treated differently than a Congressional one? I'm probably using the wrong terminology here. Hopefully someone will catch my drift.

Thanks in advance for any help.

[Robbien]

82. When it first went down

the WH was going to do nothing but then Tenet and the CIA filed a formal request for an investigation. Ashcroft hemmed and hemmed and then finally stepped back and took himself off the case. It took a while but then he assigned Fitzgerald to the case.

So Fitzgerald's investigation is the only investigation of the leak.

[54anickel]

83. Thanks Robbien. I thought Shrub promised to do something a little

more "formal" than having a chat with the boys. I thought something with a little more substance was done to back up their shouting, "We had nothing to do with it."

Lyin' shills.

[goforit]

84. Fitzgerald, eh?

Ashcroft is one of the most decietful and ugliest
politicians alive,

I don't understand why he would pick Fitzgerald.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

86. Ashcroft didn't pick Fitzgerald...it was Deputy AG Comey....

...after Ashcroft recused himself.

By the way, Fitzgerald has all of the powers of an Independent Counsel, and that means he reports only to the judges assigned to the Grand Jury.

[Don_1967]

85. What a statement !!

I think I am going to like this guy!

88. excerpt from cia officers

I took a few paragraphs from each CIA officer's discussion at the hearing on Plame July 22, 2005.


SENATE DEMOCRATIC POLICY COMMITTEE AND DEMOCRAT MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE GOVERNMENT REFORM COMMITTEE HOLD A FORUM ON THE VALERIE PLAME LEAK INVESTIGATION
JULY 22, 2005

complete transcript at
www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20050722145835-13707.pdf

LARRY JOHNSON, FORMER CIA ANALYST
The president, within the last week, has flip-flopped and backed away from his promise to fire anyone at the White House implicated in the leak. He never stipulated at the outset that there had to be some sort of judicial or criminal process to its completion. Rather, he sent the appropriate message that: If there's anyone in my staff doing this, they're going to be gone. We now know from press reports that at least Karl Rove and Scooter Libby were involved. And instead of the president being, first and foremost, concerned, in my judgment, with protecting this country and the intelligence officers who serve it, we're confronted with a president who's willing to sit by -- to this day -- while various political operatives go around and savage the good reputations of people like Valerie and Joe Wilson. This is wrong. This should stop. And it could stop in a heartbeat if the president would simply put a stop to it -- he hasn't. That speaks volumes. Without firm action to return to those principles that he promised to follow when he came to Washington, I fear that the political debate in this country will degenerate into an argument about what the meaning of "leak" is. But, as Pat correctly noted, the implications of this, the breach of trust with these people whose secrecy we've promised to protect, is far more serious and has far graver implications for the United States.

JIM MARCINKOWSKI, FORMER CIA OFFICER
Understandable to all Americans, is a simple, incontrovertible but damning truth: The
United States government exposed the identity of a clandestine officer working for the CIA (inaudible) partisan politics. The loss of secrecy in the world of espionage occur from time to time, and they may be damaging. The stealing of credibility of the CIA officers, however, is simply unforgivable. Each time the leader of a political party opens his mouth in public to deflect responsibility, the word overseas is loud and clear: Politics in this country does, in fact, trump national security. Each time a distinguished ambassador is ruthlessly attacked for the information he provides, a foreign asset will contemplate why he should risk his life when his information will not be taken seriously. Each time there is perceived a political success in deflecting responsibility by debating or re-debating some minutiae involved in this case, such actions are equally effective in undermining the ability of this country to protect itself against its enemies, because the two are, indeed, related. Each time the political machine made up of prime-time patriots and partisan ninnies display their ignorance by deriding Valerie Plame as a mere paper pusher or belittling the varying degrees of cover used to protect our officers or continuing to play partisan politics with our national security, it's a disservice to this country.

DAVID MCMICHAEL, FORMER CIA CASE OFFICER
And I want to point out to you that -- because we're talking about truth here -- in the 1991 Defense Appropriation Act, in the intelligence section, it finally incorporated a definition of covert operations. And those are -- and I paraphrase -- actions undertaken by the United States government of a political, economic or military nature conducted in foreign countries, carried out in such a way that the role of the United States is not known or, if revealed, plausibly can be denied. So we're talking plausible denial. So what we understand here is there is an element of untruth built into many intelligence operations, and it's the necessity to protect this which goes into plausible deniability. And the person most essential to be protected, as those of you who follow the debates over many years know, is the president, the administration of the United States. So there's a built-in bias here on this. What I would like to emphasize, both in supporting my colleagues entirely in the need and necessity for protecting the individuals who work in this system and devote their careers and lives to it and are paid to do it. I would also emphasize that the responsibility of the Congress here -- and I'm not being critical, I don't think, beyond what you've heard many times before -- is to work to present the truth and not to allow this system to be used not merely to smear an individual some place, but to conceal the truth from the American people. And at bottom, I think what we are dealing with today, as Larry Johnson has pointed out, in the whole buildup to the current war in which we are, there has been, let us say, less than complete regard for the truth, for delivering that truth to the American people by the administration. And at bottom, I think that is what we are all concerned with.


COLONEL PATRICK LANG (USA RET.), FORMER DIRECTOR, DEFENSE HUMAN INTELLIGENCE SERVICE
So when you have an instance like this, in fact, in which not just the intelligence community, but the elected government of the sponsoring government, of the major country in the world, deliberately, and apparently for trivial and passing political reasons, decides to disclose the identity of a covered officer, the word goes around the world like a shock, in fact, that, in fact, "The Americans can't be trusted -- the Americans can't be trusted. If you decide to cooperate clandestinely with the Americans, someone back there will give you up -- someone will give you up, and then everything will be over for you." So you don't do it. And so the very kinds of people you need to get into the heart of this galaxy of jihadi groups and people like this will make a judgment that they are not going to trust you in this way. And once that happens, then the possibility of penetrating these groups, the possibility of knowing that they're going to carry 10-pound bags of explosive in the subway stations, will go right down the drain. It will be done forever. It would take forever to get that back, because this is all about trust and this is a violation of trust.

:freak: